Ecology and Society

Journal: Ecology and Society

Publisher

Resilience Alliance

ISSN

1708-3087

Show all metadata

Search Results

Publications 1 - 10 of 35

Strengthening Regional Cohesion
Hirschi, Christian (2010)
Ecology and Society
Sustainable Land-use Practices in European Mountain Regions under Global Change
Huber, Robert; Bugmann, Harald; Buttler, Alexandre; et al. (2013)
Ecology and Society
A Contextual Analysis of Land-Use and Vegetation Changes in Two Wooded Pastures in the Swiss Jura Mountains
Chetelat, Joël; Kalbermatten, Michael; Lannas, Kathryn S. M.; et al. (2013)
Ecology and Society
Effects of Educational Attainment on Climate Risk Vulnerability
Striessnig, Erich; Lutz, Wolfgang; Patt, Anthony (2013)
Ecology and Society
The Use of Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Forest Management
Rist, Lucy; Shaanker, R. Uma; Milner-Gulland, E.J.; et al. (2010)
Ecology and Society
The Rauischholzhausen agenda for road ecology
Roedenbeck, Inga A.; Fahrig, Lenore; Findlay, C. Scott; et al. (2007)
Ecology and Society
Main challenges and key features of indicator-based agroecological assessment frameworks in the context of international cooperation
Wiget, Milena; Muller, Adrian; Hilbeck, Angelika (2020)
Ecology and Society
Agroecology increasingly gains importance in the discussion about sustainable food systems. To facilitate the transition from conventional farming to agroecological farming, adequate methods and concepts to measure and assess impact and productivity of agroecological farming systems (AFSs) are needed, which consider their multifunctionality and other specific characteristics, here called agroecological sustainability assessment frameworks and tools (ASAFTs). In the past years, many agricultural sustainability assessment tools and frameworks were developed but their suitability and applicability to AFSs was not investigated. To close this knowledge gap, we aimed at identifying, reviewing, and discussing published ASAFTs in the context of international cooperation, providing an overview of the current challenges, needs, and requirements in assessing AFSs at the farm level with the means of indicators. Desktop and scientific database research was conducted to identify and discuss published indicator-based ASAFTs at the farm level. The analysis was based on the following four framework elements that the authors considered to be essential for ASAFTs: (1) the adaptability to local conditions all over the world, (2) the involvement of farmers in the development process, (3) the consideration of the multiple functions of an agroecosystem in the definition and measurement of its productivity, and (4) the accounting for interactions between multiple agroecosystem functions and their measurement. Only a few analyzed assessment frameworks at least partly consider these essential elements and were designed specifically for AFSs. However, our study also showed that these frameworks were (1) restricted in their geographical application scope, (2) quite heterogeneous and barely comparable, and (3) based on productivity indicators that do not fully capture the multiple functions of AFSs. Therefore, we identified the need for the development of appropriate agroecological productivity indicators and common standard or reference frameworks for assessing AFSs, which will be crucial for upscaling agroecology.
Methods and procedures of transdisciplinary knowledge integration: Empirical insights from four thematic synthesis processes
Hoffmann, Sabine; Pohl, Christian Erik; Hering, Janet G. (2017)
Ecology and Society
What methods and procedures support transdisciplinary knowledge integration? We address this question by exploring knowledge integration within four thematic synthesis processes of the Swiss National Research Programme 61 Sustainable Water Management (NRP 61). Drawing on literature from inter- and transdisciplinary research, we developed an analytical framework to map different methods and procedures of knowledge integration. We use this framework to characterize the variety of methods and procedures that were combined in the four processes to produce thematic synthesis reports. We suggest that the variety of combinations observed reflects the different objectives and questions that guided the processes of knowledge integration as well as the different roles that leaders assumed in these processes. Although the framework was developed in the course of NRP 61, we consider it as a basis for designing ex ante new synthesis processes by defining and sequencing different synthesis stages and by identifying, for each stage, the contributions of specific scientific and societal actors, the purpose of their contributions, and the methods and procedures supporting their contributions. Used in a formative evaluation process, the framework supports reflection on and adaptation of synthesis processes and also facilitates the generation of new knowledge for designing future processes.
Addressing the resilience of tomato farmers in Ghana facing a double exposure from climate and market
Benabderrazik, Kenza; Jeangros, Laurence; Kopainsky, Birgit; et al. (2022)
Ecology and Society
Ghanaian tomato farmers are severely impacted by changing climate and related more frequent and extreme weather events such as drought and heavy rainfall. Furthermore, tomato production represents one of the main sources of income for these farmers, which leaves them highly exposed to market price variations. However, the full impact of changing climate and price variations for these farmers has not been assessed. Here, we examined how Ghanaian tomato farmers experience and respond to a double exposure from climate and market related shocks. The objectives were threefold: (i) to investigate how farmers in two different agroecological zones (savannah and semi-equatorial) experience climate and market shocks, (ii) to examine the major response strategies implemented in face of this double exposure, and (iii) to identify paths toward systemic changes to enhance resilience. A survey was conducted with 344 tomato smallholder farmers in the two agroecological zones. The results from the survey were complemented by semi-structured interviews and focus groups. We found that farmers are severely exposed to climate and market shocks, which causes a reduction in both production activities and revenues. A set of agricultural and water management practices, such as crop rotation, supplementary fertilization, and water tanks, have been adopted by farmers as response mechanisms to climate variations. However, no response mechanisms, other than agricultural diversification, are in place yet to face the economic shocks. Thus, enhancing systemic resilience becomes particularly important to face this double exposure and restructure and change feedback mechanisms within the current system. The reestablishment of tomato processing plants or formalizing the stakeholders’ network could both be ways to integrate value-chain stakeholders and support appropriate structures. Encompassing both climate and trading attributes through specific agro-food policies are much-needed for a sustainable and resilient transformation of the tomato production system.
EVOlvINC: Evaluating knowledge integration capacity in multistakeholder governance
Hitziger, Martin; Aragrande, Maurizio; Berezowski, John A.; et al. (2019)
Ecology and Society
Research and policy processes in many fields, such as sustainability and health, are increasingly relying on transdisciplinary cooperation among a multitude of governmental, nongovernmental, and private actors from local to global levels. In the absence of hierarchical chains of command, multistakeholder governance may accommodate conflicting or diverse interests and facilitate collective action, but its effectiveness depends on its capacity to integrate systems, transformation, and target knowledge. Approaches to foster such governance are nascent and quickly evolving, and methodological standards to facilitate comparison and learning from best practice are needed. However, there is currently no evaluation approach that (i) comprehensively assesses the capacity for knowledge integration in multistakeholder governance, (ii) draws on the best available knowledge that is being developed in various fields, and (iii) combines a systematic and transferable methodological design with pragmatic feasibility. We brought together 20 experts from institutions in nine countries, all working on evaluation approaches for collaborative science–policy initiatives. In a synthesis process that included a 2-day workshop and follow-up work among a core group of participants, we developed a tool for evaluating knowledge integration capacity in multistakeholder governance (EVOLvINC). Its 23 indicators incorporate previously defined criteria and components of transdisciplinary evaluations into a single, comprehensive framework that operationalizes the capacity for integrating systems, target, and transformation knowledge during an initiative’s (a) design and planning processes at the policy formulation stage, (b) organization and working processes at the implementation stage, and (c) sharing and learning processes at the evaluation stage of the policy cycle. EVOLvINC is (i) implemented through a questionnaire, (ii) builds on established indicators where possible, (iii) offers a consistent and transparent semiquantitative scoring and aggregation algorithm, and (iv) uses spider diagrams for visualizing results. The tool builds on experience and expertise from both the northern and southern hemispheres and was empirically validated with seven science–policy initiatives in six African and Asian countries. As a generalized framework, EVOLvINC thus enables a structured reflection on the capacity of multistakeholder governance processes to foster knowledge integration. Its emphasis on dialog and exploration allows adaptation to contextual specificities, highlights relative strengths and weaknesses, and suggests avenues for shaping multistakeholder governance toward mutual learning, capacity building, and strengthened networks. The validation suggests that the adaptive capacity of multistakeholder governance could be best enhanced by considering systems characteristics at the policy formulation stage and fostering adaptive and generic learning at the evaluation stage of the policy cycle.

Publications 1 - 10 of 35

Journal: Ecology and Society

Abbreviation

Publisher

Journal Volumes

ISSN

Description

Filters

Search Results